Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
By the way BB I was expecting some Tommy Robinson thread from you, he's up before the Courts on the 22nd March and faces up to two years according to meda reports.
A white supremacist just killed 49 people with a modern sporting rifle in New Zeland. Terrible thing.
Umm, no. A complete and utter nut job just massacred 49 people on New Zealand with the stated intention of causing social strife and discord. The "white supremacist" angle may or may not be as true as the rest of his manifesto, but the insanity is beyond question.
A white supremacist just killed 49 people with a modern sporting rifle in New Zeland. Terrible thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRom
Umm, no. A complete and utter nut job just massacred 49 people on New Zealand with the stated intention of causing social strife and discord. The "white supremacist" angle may or may not be as true as the rest of his manifesto, but the insanity is beyond question.
Not sure why you'd try to deny something which is factually true. Of course he was a nut job, but he was also a white supremacist who assaulted and killed 49 people with a modern sporting rifle (politically correct way to refer to the firearm in question).
Should be self-evident: an "assault style weapon" is a weapon designed in the "style" of an assault weapon.
Unfortunately there are several definitions of it out there. One is defined by Bill Clinton's 1994 legislation. There have been efforts to change the definition.
The definition I like is the one now being used in Washington State, as we passed some restrictions just last year. The new law defined "assault rifle" (not "weapon") as being any semiautomatic rifle. This really simplifies the discussion.
You mean those restrictions that didn't actually restrict anything? The same ones in California that didn't restrict anything. What a bunch of useless laws.
The laws LE has said they won't even try to enforce, because there is no actual way to legally do it.
Did they? It would not surprise me, because that is what the guy was.
I would not go too far defending this guy if I were you.
Nobody is defending the guy. What we would like to make crystal clear is the average gun owner is in no way tied in any way to that devil. Or any devil that goes on a rampage killing people. Especially in the name of religion.
Did they? It would not surprise me, because that is what the guy was.
I would not go too far defending this guy if I were you.
O.K., so he is (lets just say), in your mind....what does that have to do with this country?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
